Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - User Fees and Patriotism

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

User Fees and Patriotism
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

panamared5(at)brier.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:14 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

 	  Quote: 	
		  Sadly, if it means some Americans can have a few more cents (or think

they'll have a few more cents) in their pockets and someone else makes the

sacrifice, either with their lives or their money, then,yes, I think that's

what America wants


	


The above quote could be used to describe the War in Iraq, War in 

Afghanistan and the War on Terror.  These wars are fought by the 

Volunteer Military with little or no sacrifice from the rest of 

us.  The Iraq war was to cost $30 Billion, it is now over $300 Billion.



My point is that the US Government needs the money.  If you call it a 

tax or a user fee,  a turnpike toll, entrance into a National Park or 

a landing fee, all are euphemism for the Government needing more money.



In my mind the decision to implement user fees were made long before 

the 2006 elections.  The Administration is just waiting for the right 

time to announce them.  The Airlines seem to think that user fees 

will spread the costs over to General Aviation.  But, when user fees 

are implemented, the airlines cost will not be reduced (how many 

taxes are ever phased out or reduced).  The airlines will continue to 

pay as much or more and General Aviation will pay more, and if by 

some miracle the FAA starts to make a profit then that money will go 

into the general fund to help pay for the many wars we are involved in.



Every extra dollar collected by the FAA for user fees will increase 

the amount of taxpayer dollars from the general fund that then can be 

used to pay for the wars.  To put this in "Administration Talk," user 

fees "Support the Troops" and opposing them means we are unpatriotic.



No matter what your political views may be, "Somebody has got to 

Pay"!  We are just debating who and how much.



Bob

RV6 "Wicked Witch of the West"

n616tb(at)btsapps.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:38 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

That ought to get the list moving.  I am going flying for awhile.

Do Not Archive

Tim



[quote] --

tedd(at)vansairforce.org
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:13 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

 	  Quote: 	
		   No matter what your political views may be, "Somebody has got to

 Pay"!  We are just debating who and how much.


	


Bob:



We already know that the debate is about who pays and how much they pay.  After

all, we're the ones doing the debating.  What we'd like to know is what you

think about THAT subject.  There are lots of non-aviaion groups where you can

discuss other stuff.



Tedd McHenry

Surrey, BC, Canada

DO NOT ARCHIVE

jpl(at)showpage.org
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:57 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

I think Bob was trying to show how people outside the GA crowd may  

feel about the issue.  Most non-flying folks won't care one way or  

the other.

I think everyone concerned about this issue should take it into  

consideration in upcoming elections over the next couple of years.

-Joe

do not archive

On Apr 17, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Tedd McHenry wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

> No matter what your political views may be, "Somebody has got to

> Pay"!  We are just debating who and how much.

 Bob:

 We already know that the debate is about who pays and how much they  

 pay.  After

 all, we're the ones doing the debating.  What we'd like to know is  

 what you

 think about THAT subject.  There are lots of non-aviaion groups  

 where you can

 discuss other stuff.

 Tedd McHenry

 Surrey, BC, Canada

 DO NOT ARCHIVE

jsflyrv(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:05 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

People won't care till they come to tax them for their favorite activity 

and then wonder why no one is supporting their opposition the tax.



Joseph Larson wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I think Bob was trying to show how people outside the GA crowd may  

 feel about the issue.  Most non-flying folks won't care one way or  

 the other.



 I think everyone concerned about this issue should take it into  

 consideration in upcoming elections over the next couple of years.



 -Joe



 do not archive



 On Apr 17, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Tedd McHenry wrote:



> 

>

>> No matter what your political views may be, "Somebody has got to

>> Pay"!  We are just debating who and how much.

> Bob:

>

> We already know that the debate is about who pays and how much they  

> pay.  After

> all, we're the ones doing the debating.  What we'd like to know is  

> what you

> think about THAT subject.  There are lots of non-aviaion groups  

> where you can

> discuss other stuff.

>

> Tedd McHenry

> Surrey, BC, Canada

> DO NOT ARCHIVE

>

Vanremog(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

In a message dated 4/17/2007 1:58:33 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  jpl(at)showpage.org writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  I think    everyone concerned about this issue should take it into     

consideration in upcoming elections over the next couple of  years. 	


 

 =========================================

  

 And how is that supposed to help?  We were told by the Republicans  that the bad Democrats wanted the user fees, but that they would preserve our  god given right to fly, so many voted for Republicans in the last few  elections.  That sure worked well.   

 GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 842hrs, Silicon Valley,  CA)



See what's free at AOL.com. 

  [quote][b]

jpl(at)showpage.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:22 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

Maybe rather than listening to the Republicans about what the Democrats are saying, or listening to the Democrats about what the Republicans are saying, we should listen to each side and then decide if what they're saying is in line with how they're voting.

Politicians lie.  Politicians especially lie about their opposition.  I form my opinion about a particular politician primarily based on what he says and what he does.  I pay attention to what others say about him, too, but I take all that with a huge grain of salt.



There *are* good people to vote for -- in both parties.



-Joe

do not archive



On Apr 17, 2007, at 10:51 PM, Vanremog(at)aol.com (Vanremog(at)aol.com) wrote:

[quote]   In a message dated 4/17/2007 1:58:33 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jpl(at)showpage.org (jpl(at)showpage.org) writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  I think   everyone concerned about this issue should take it into    

consideration in upcoming elections over the next couple of years. 	


 

 =========================================

  

 And how is that supposed to help?  We were told by the Republicans that the bad Democrats wanted the user fees, but that they would preserve our god given right to fly, so many voted for Republicans in the last few elections.  That sure worked well.  

 GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 842hrs, Silicon Valley, CA)





[b]

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:34 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

Although I really can't wait for my Flying magazine  subscription to expire (you know, I'm just not interested in VLJs or the  Citation Mustang or even the Cirrus, or Dick Whatsisnames spiffy new GPS that  costs more than sending kids to four years of private school), I do think Mac  (From the right Seat) had a good approach to this issue.  It's entirely  likely that the best way to approach this is to stress that we'll be handing  over our nation's skies to a corporation. That's an interesting concept since  the sky -- even for people who don't fly -- is a symbol of freedom and  openness... and maybe there should be something in this country that isn't owned  by a corporation.

  

 I think that argument might resonate with people who  couldn't give a hoot about how much people who can afford to fly in the first  place have to pay.

  

 As for politics and politicians..... well, I cover 'em for  a living...so....umm... hey, how about those RV airplanes, eh?  (g)

  

 Do not archive



   From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Joseph  Larson

Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:20 AM

To:  rv-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: User Fees and  Patriotism

 

Maybe rather than listening to the Republicans about what the  Democrats are saying, or listening to the Democrats about what the Republicans  are saying, we should listen to each side and then decide if what they're saying  is in line with how they're voting. 

 Politicians lie. Politicians especially lie about their opposition. I form  my opinion about a particular politician primarily based on what he says and  what he does. I pay attention to what others say about him, too, but I take all  that with a huge grain of salt.

 

 There *are* good people to vote for -- in both parties.

 

 -Joe

 do not archive

  

  On Apr 17, 2007, at 10:51 PM, Vanremog(at)aol.com (Vanremog(at)aol.com) wrote:

 [quote]      In a message dated 4/17/2007 1:58:33 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jpl(at)showpage.org (jpl(at)showpage.org) writes:

    	  Quote: 	
		  I      think everyone concerned about this issue should take it into      

consideration in upcoming elections over the next couple of    years. 	


   

   =========================================

   

   And how is that supposed to help? We were told by the Republicans that    the bad Democrats wanted the user fees, but that they would preserve our god    given right to fly, so many voted for Republicans in the last few elections.    That sure worked well.    

   GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 842hrs, Silicon    Valley, CA)

   







href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com



[b]

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

jfogarty(at)tds.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:54 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

I believe the hard part for people to understand is how much commerce comes 

to each local airport and cities across the USA as we fly around.  This is 

something each of us should be conveying at local airport events.  We can do 

this by telling people and or through our local publications.  Just think of 

the money that is spent this week for all the people traveling to Sun and 

Fun.  That's not just $100 hamburger.  If  someone fly's into Kentucky he or 

she may like it there and someday come back or for that one landing buy 

goods and services.  It's all about the money, and we need to tell that to 

our legislator's and our local business community.



Jim

---

rv8ch

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 250
Location: Switzerland

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:59 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

> ...  It's

 > entirely likely that the best way to approach this is to stress that

 > we'll be handing over our nation's skies to a corporation. That's an

 > interesting concept since the sky -- even for people who don't fly -- is

 > a symbol of freedom and openness... and maybe there should be something

 > in this country that isn't owned by a corporation.



I think Bob has hit the nail squarely on the head.  The reason we have a 

harder and harder time distinguishing between the two major parties is 

that they are both serving the same corporate masters, not "we the people".



Does anyone think for a minute that we'd have privatized FSS if there 

was not a large corporation making massive contributions to various 

politicians of both stripes?



I don't in any way blame the corporations for this behavior - they are 

obliged to act in the best interest of their shareholders, and 

influencing the government in their direction with cash contributions 

provides an outstanding ROI.  The problem is us - we allow this to happen.

-- 

Mickey Coggins

http://www.rv8.ch/

#82007 finishing

do not archive

_________________
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/

panamared5(at)brier.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:20 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

My point is that as long as soldiers in Iraq are using substandard 

equipment and dying at a rate of 3-6 a day, I am all for (me 

personally) paying user fees; if user fees will reduce the number of 

US casualties or end the war sooner.

  I feel that the $300+Billion we have spent in Iraq would have been 

more than adequate to fund the entire FAA and ATC modernization program.

I can argue for or against the war, but I am a proponent of paying 

for it now, rather than adding to the National Debt. If that means 

user fees, I am all for it!

I get frustrated with people who support the war but want to cut the 

taxes (stop user fees, etc.)!

Bob

At 03:11 PM 4/17/07, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 > No matter what your political views may be, "Somebody has got to

 > Pay"!  We are just debating who and how much.

Bob:

We already know that the debate is about who pays and how much they 

pay.  After

all, we're the ones doing the debating.  What we'd like to know is what you

think about THAT subject.  There are lots of non-aviaion groups where you can

discuss other stuff.

Tedd McHenry

Surrey, BC, Canada

DO NOT ARCHIVE

cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:24 am Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

Of course, there are those that will say that those thousands of people

flying to OSH are simply wasting tens of thousands of gallons of

gasoline and jet fuel that just makes us more dependent on foreign

suppliers.  And that this great migration does little except burn

organic carbon fuel, further compounding the global warming problem for

no purpose other than a self-indulgent personal interest, past time and

hobby.



I'm sure OSH businesses think OSH is a great idea, but beyond those

local self interests, I doubt much emotion can be stirred.  I may not

agree this perspective, but then, I'm a pilot.  As always, it is in the

eye of the beholder.



Chuck Jensen

Jim Fogarty wrote..........



I believe the hard part for people to understand is how much commerce

comes 

to each local airport and cities across the USA as we fly around.  This

is 

something each of us should be conveying at local airport events.  We

can do 

this by telling people and or through our local publications.  Just

think of 

the money that is spent this week for all the people traveling to Sun

and 

Fun.  That's not just $100 hamburger.  If  someone fly's into Kentucky

he or 

she may like it there and someday come back or for that one landing buy 

goods and services.  It's all about the money, and we need to tell that

to 

our legislator's and our local business community.



Jim

michael.phil(at)ca.rr.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:06 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

Could'nt have said it better.



Do not archieve

---- Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> wrote: 

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

  > ...  It's

  > entirely likely that the best way to approach this is to stress that

  > we'll be handing over our nation's skies to a corporation. That's an

  > interesting concept since the sky -- even for people who don't fly -- is

  > a symbol of freedom and openness... and maybe there should be something

  > in this country that isn't owned by a corporation.

 

 I think Bob has hit the nail squarely on the head.  The reason we have a 

 harder and harder time distinguishing between the two major parties is 

 that they are both serving the same corporate masters, not "we the people".

 

 Does anyone think for a minute that we'd have privatized FSS if there 

 was not a large corporation making massive contributions to various 

 politicians of both stripes?

 

 I don't in any way blame the corporations for this behavior - they are 

 obliged to act in the best interest of their shareholders, and 

 influencing the government in their direction with cash contributions 

 provides an outstanding ROI.  The problem is us - we allow this to happen.

 

 

 -- 

 Mickey Coggins

 http://www.rv8.ch/

 #82007 finishing

 

 

 do not archive

khorton01(at)rogers.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:07 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:33:48 -0500

"Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Although I really can't wait for my Flying magazine subscription to expire

 (you know, I'm just not interested in VLJs or the Citation Mustang or even

 the Cirrus, or Dick Whatsisnames spiffy new GPS that costs more than sending

 kids to four years of private school), I do think Mac (From the right Seat)

 had a good approach to this issue.  It's entirely likely that the best way

 to approach this is to stress that we'll be handing over our nation's skies

 to a corporation. That's an interesting concept since the sky -- even for

 people who don't fly -- is a symbol of freedom and openness... and maybe

 there should be something in this country that isn't owned by a corporation.

  

 I think that argument might resonate with people who couldn't give a hoot

 about how much people who can afford to fly in the first place have to pay.


	


Sure.  That'll work.  Just like people would never stand for having roads or bridges being owned by a corporation, and having to pay a toll to use them.  The automobile owning public would never stand for that, so I'm sure they will understand why aircraft owners should be able to fly for "free".



Kevin Horton

jpl(at)showpage.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

Bob, I think one of the issues with user fees is that it's an  

inefficient means of collecting funds. If the argument is that we  

need additional funds to support the war, then we should be honest  

about that, not act as if user fees are to pay for the FAA.



-Joe

do not archive

On Apr 18, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Bob wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 My point is that as long as soldiers in Iraq are using substandard  

 equipment and dying at a rate of 3-6 a day, I am all for (me  

 personally) paying user fees; if user fees will reduce the number  

 of US casualties or end the war sooner.



  I feel that the $300+Billion we have spent in Iraq would have been  

 more than adequate to fund the entire FAA and ATC modernization  

 program.



 I can argue for or against the war, but I am a proponent of paying  

 for it now, rather than adding to the National Debt. If that means  

 user fees, I am all for it!



 I get frustrated with people who support the war but want to cut  

 the taxes (stop user fees, etc.)!

 Bob

rv7(at)b4.ca
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:46 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

On 12:24 2007-04-18 "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen(at)dts9000.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   And that this great migration does little except burn

 organic carbon fuel, further compounding the global warming problem

 for no purpose other than a self-indulgent personal interest, past

 time and hobby.


	


And, truth be told, they wouldn't be wrong, either.  But the same could be

said for the people who drive their RV's south to Florida for the winter,

or take their snowmobiles, dirtbikes, or ATV's into the wilderness, head

out on their boat, etc.



Unfortunately for us, engine technology hasn't changed a lot in the last 50

years.  We're still flying behind Lycomings that remain largely unchanged

year over year.  Compare/contrast that to the developments in engine

technology in motorcycles, boats, cars, etc.  We're still running the

gas-guzzlers.



But it's not a reason to stop flying.



-Rob

Terry Watson

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 290
Location: Seattle, WA USA

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:46 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

The late great Nobel winning economist Milton Friedman was known to say that

the government spends three dollars to do a one-dollar job. I would add that

they do that when they contract out the work; when they do it themselves

they spend more like five dollars to do a one dollar job, or more often a

job that doesn't need to be done in the first place.  And when it does need

doing it would be done better by leaving it to those with a direct interest

in doing it.



Jeppesen started keeping notes so he could fly the mail (contracted from the

government) to distant towns when the weather was less than ideal. This

turned out to be a very valuable service -- so the government decided to do

it themselves. After all these years, Jeppesen still does a better job for a

competitive price. I wonder what those nearly "free" government approach

plates and charts really cost us. 



Someone has to pay for an air traffic control system that keeps airplanes

from running into each other in areas of heavy traffic. I'm in favor of the

costs being paid by the beneficiaries, as I think most of us are. But most

of us also want that to be someone else. The airlines want it to be general

aviation; general aviation maintains that we need the system far less than

the airlines so they should pay. The political system makes this a contest

of political power rather than reason. 



Maybe the problem is that we have allowed the government to amass way too

much control over our lives, which the "in" crowd trades among themselves as

if it were stocks or bonds. You don't need an advanced degree and thousands

of pages of regulations and tens of thousands of regulators to fly a small

airplane safely. Maybe fighting over who pays for all that is fighting the

wrong battle.



As for all those evil corporations, a corporation is just a legal entity

made up of individuals for some specific purpose. If you want to blame all

the ills of the world on corporations, you must also to be fair recognize

that virtually all the products we use, from clothing to entertainment to

food and drugs and airplane kits would not be possible without the legal

entity of corporations. Try to buy your next gallon of gas from a vertically

integrated small unincorporated fuel supplier. Try to send your next email

without using the services of a corporation. It's fine and fair to dislike

wrongdoing by any individual or organization. It's bigotry to identify them

only by their legal structure or skin color, religion, or whatever

convenient but irrelevant attribute.



Terry

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: Re: User Fees and Patriotism

 	  khorton01(at)rogers.com wrote: 	
		  Sure.  That'll work.  Just like people would never stand for having roads or bridges being owned by a corporation, and having to pay a toll to use them.  The automobile owning public would never stand for that, so I'm sure they will understand why aircraft owners should be able to fly for "free".



Kevin Horton 	




Let me take another stab at it then. The strategy is that we equate open skies with..well... America. You know, flag and bald eagles and all of that . Sure, it's a marketing ploy, but if we can get a bunch of folks over to "our" side on the strength of a concept as opposed to trying to win some battle of the spreadsheets, well, isn't that the idea?

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

jpl(at)showpage.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:30 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

Terry,



I agree with the second paragraph below.  I've gotten tired of  

"corporate profits" being a dirty word.  WIthout profits, the  

corporation wouldn't exist, the jobs wouldn't exist, and the products/ 

services wouldn't exist.



But I think I disagree with the last sentence I retained from the  

first paragraph.  I'm more than happy to pay my fair share.  And I  

don't know if I'm currently doing that through fuel taxes and the  

other aviation-related fees I already pay.  I think most pilots would  

agree with me.



My experience with other pilots is that we're accustomed to taking  

responsibility for ourselves.  While we're more than happy to fly on  

someone else's dollar, it's not something we expect, and we pay our  

own way through life.  I've never met a pilot I thought was just  

hoping for a free ride through life.



I think instead that private pilots pretty much universally agree  

with these statements:



-Those who benefit from the ATC system should pay for it

-No one should have to pay for more than their fair share

-But we don't want the payment system to discourage safe flying  

practices



The last two points tend to work against each other.



-J



On Apr 18, 2007, at 3:46 PM, Terry Watson wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 Someone has to pay for an air traffic control system that keeps  

 airplanes

 from running into each other in areas of heavy traffic. I'm in  

 favor of the

 costs being paid by the beneficiaries, as I think most of us are.  

 But most

 of us also want that to be someone else.




	


 	  Quote: 	
		   As for all those evil corporations, a corporation is just a legal  

 entity

 made up of individuals for some specific purpose. If you want to  

 blame all

 the ills of the world on corporations, you must also to be fair  

 recognize

 that virtually all the products we use, from clothing to  

 entertainment to

 food and drugs and airplane kits would not be possible without the  

 legal

 entity of corporations.

khorton01(at)rogers.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:03 pm Post subject: User Fees and Patriotism

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Unfortunately for us, engine technology hasn't changed a lot in the  

 last 50

 years.  We're still flying behind Lycomings that remain largely  

 unchanged

 year over year.  Compare/contrast that to the developments in engine

 technology in motorcycles, boats, cars, etc.  We're still running the

 gas-guzzlers.


	


Which in-production gasoline-powered cars have a brake specific fuel  

consumption lower than a fuel-injected Lycoming running lean of  

peak?  With references please.



Kevin Horton         RV-8 (finishing kit)

Ottawa, Canada

http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 1 of 4

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum